Re: [3/5] urlmon: Implemented canonicalization for ports in URIs

[Alexandre Julliard]

Thomas Mullaly <thomas.mullaly(a)gmail.com> writes:
> ---
>  dlls/urlmon/uri.c |   88
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>  1 files changed, 86 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

It doesn't work here:

../../../tools/runtest -q -P wine -M urlmon.dll -T ../../.. -p urlmon_test.exe.so uri.c && touch uri.ok
uri.c:2788: Test failed: Error: Expected a length of 0 but got -2 on uri_tests[13].str_props[6].
make: *** [uri.ok] Error 1

-- 
Alexandre Julliard
julliard(a)winehq.org

[3/5] urlmon: Implemented canonicalization for ports in URIs

[Thomas Mullaly]

On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 8:14 AM, Alexandre Julliard <julliard(a)winehq.org>wrote:
> Thomas Mullaly <thomas.mullaly(a)gmail.com> writes:
> > ---
> >  dlls/urlmon/uri.c |   88
> > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> >  1 files changed, 86 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> It doesn't work here:
>
> ../../../tools/runtest -q -P wine -M urlmon.dll -T ../../.. -p
> urlmon_test.exe.so uri.c && touch uri.ok
> uri.c:2788: Test failed: Error: Expected a length of 0 but got -2 on
> uri_tests[13].str_props[6].
> make: *** [uri.ok] Error 1

Hmm... that's weird. The patch didn't change any of the test cases nor did
it even change any of the implementations that it's now failing on.

I would like to ask if you could ignore the whole patch set until I figure
out what's going on, since the bug might have been introduced earlier in the
set. Thanks.

-- 
Thomas Mullaly
thomas.mullaly(a)gmail.com